Holmes v. Barnwell County Detention Center

Filing 42

ORDER allowing Plaintiff fourteen (14) days from the date of this order to provide the court with evidence that the individuals listed on the Process Receipt and Returns for Defendants Carroll and Charlton were authorized to a ccept service on behalf of those defendants pursuant to Rule 4(e)(2)(C) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. If Plaintiff fails to produce evidence that Defendants Carroll and Charlton have been properly served, the court may dismiss those defen dants pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). (Evidence of proper service due by 12/14/2017. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 or Fed. R. Crim. P. 45.) Signed by Magistrate Judge Paige J. Gossett on 11/30/2017. (bgoo)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Romell Holmes,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
Ed Carrol, Barnwell Detention Center; Latoya )
Buckton, Southern Health Partner; Deloris
)
Charlton, Administrator at Barnwell County
)
Detention Center,
)
)
Defendants.
)
_____________________________________ )

C/A No. 0:17-1257-HMH-PJG

ORDER

This is a civil action filed by a self-represented state prisoner. Under Local Civil Rule
73.02(B)(2) (D.S.C.), pretrial proceedings in this action have been referred to the assigned United
States Magistrate Judge.
By order dated October 3, 2017, the court authorized the issuance and service of process
against the defendants. (ECF No. 22.) The summonses were returned executed on October 16,
2015. (ECF No. 29.) However, Defendants Carroll and Charlton have not filed a responsive
pleading, and the time to do so has passed. Additionally, no counsel has entered an appearance on
their behalf.
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a), the Clerk of Court must enter default
against Defendants Carroll and Charlton if it can be shown by affidavit or otherwise that the
defendants have failed to plead or otherwise defend. However, entry of default at this time does not
appear to be appropriate because the Process Receipt and Return for those defendants appear to show

Page 1 of 2

that individuals other than the named defendants accepted service on their behalf. (ECF No. 29 at
1, 3.)
Consequently, it is hereby
ORDERED that Plaintiff be given fourteen (14) days from the date of this order to provide
the court with evidence that the individuals listed on the Process Receipt and Returns for Defendants
Carroll and Charlton were authorized to accept service on behalf of those defendants pursuant to
Rule 4(e)(2)(C) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. If Plaintiff fails to produce evidence that
Defendants Carroll and Charlton have been properly served, the court may dismiss those defendants
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m).
IT IS SO ORDERED.

___________________________________
Paige J. Gossett
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
November 30, 2017
Columbia, South Carolina

Page 2 of 2